This provides no new insight or any real insight at all.
He makes a fairly straightforward argument that it makes no difference that the contract refers to something as 'The Face Book'; if Facebook, the subsequent project and company are not what the contract is about then Ceglia does not have a claim to 84% of Facebook, Inc.
No one is claiming it's clear either.
Henry Blodget describes an aspect of the contract as 'crystal clear' and that's what the author is commenting on.
Now, maybe you disagree with the author's analysis but 'no insight at all' and 'no one is claiming it's clear' are a bit of a stretch.
He makes a fairly straightforward argument that it makes no difference that the contract refers to something as 'The Face Book'; if Facebook, the subsequent project and company are not what the contract is about then Ceglia does not have a claim to 84% of Facebook, Inc.
No one is claiming it's clear either.
Henry Blodget describes an aspect of the contract as 'crystal clear' and that's what the author is commenting on.
Now, maybe you disagree with the author's analysis but 'no insight at all' and 'no one is claiming it's clear' are a bit of a stretch.